(first posted 10/8/2012) For a long time, stepping up to a Pontiac meant getting a genuinely nicer vehicle whose differences went beyond the grille and trim. For example, this Catalina–the most basic full-size 1972 Pontiac you could get–came equipped with a standard V8, power steering and power brakes. For the miser’s special, you’d have to go across the street for a Turbo-Thrift Six, three-on-the-tree Biscayne, because there was no such animal from PMD.
The 1970 Pontiacs that preceded our featured Catalina were very different from the sleek Pontiacs of the early- to mid-’60s. Based on the same basic platform as Paul’s favorite ’70 Impala, they were all-around nice cars, despite a questionable face lift that made them a bit baroque-looking in front view. A year later, they would be replaced by a super-sized version.
The 1971s were more subdued up front. In place of the chrome radiator shell of the ’70 was another prominent grille, this time a full-width affair that made the car look even wider than it was. In an odd move, a new Grand Ville model appeared at the top of the line.
In the early ’70s, Pontiac began to step away from being the powerhouse of style and performance it had been during the previous decade. With models like the Grand Ville, was Pontiac trying to become more junior Buick than premium Chevrolet?
The Grand Ville’s introduction moved the storied Bonneville down a step, into the slot left by the recently departed Executive series; Pontiac’s volume biggie, the Catalina, returned.
As before, the Catalina was available in a variety of models: two- and four-door hardtops; a sedan; a convertible; and six- and nine-passenger station wagons. Joining the standard Catalina was a new Catalina Brougham series, which effectively replaced the Ventura as a Catalina with a little more gingerbread.
With all that was new for 1971, there were only minor changes for the 1972 model year. The somewhat awkward grille of the ’71 was replaced with a much more attractive classic-style grille. The Grand Ville, Bonneville, Catalina and Catalina Brougham lineup remained the same. Closed Grand Ville models (a convertible was also available) were set apart from other B-body Pontiacs by roof lines shared with the C-body Oldses, Buicks and Cadillacs. Grand Villes like this ’72 four-door hardtop enjoy the distinction of being the only GM B-bodies with C-body roofs.
Although no longer the top-drawer Pontiac, the Bonneville was still quite nice, and also quite popular. As seen in this brochure picture, it and other non-Grand Villes had a more flowing roof line. Meantime, Pontiac dropped the Bonneville drop-top in favor of the Grand Ville convertible.
But hey, we’re here to talk about the Catalina, aren’t we? Unlike the wider-ranging full-size lineup from Chevrolet, Pontiac’s roster contained no fleet/tightwad special. If you wanted rubber floor mats, a six-cylinder engine and no chrome gewgaws, you were, sadly, plain out of luck. The Catalina sedan may have been the cheapest big Pontiac, but it still boasted a two-barrel, 400 cu in V8, automatic transmission, variable-ratio power steering and power front disc/rear drum brakes. Cheapskates would have to be directed to the Chevy store across the street to check out Bel Airs and Biscaynes.
Yes, the Catalina was quite well-equipped for an early-’70s American car; back then, it seemed that everything cost extra. But the Cat was the exception to the rule, with its standard solid foam front seats and seat backs, nylon carpeting, teak woodgrain on the dash and door panels, concealed wipers and a finicky radio antenna embedded in the windshield.
Outside, Catalinas were dressed up with bright moldings around the roof gutters and at the rear edge of the hood. Hubcaps were standard, but the optional full wheel covers and vinyl roof seen on our featured Cat produced a very rich-looking car.
Of course and ultimately, you did pay more for the Catalina’s extra features: A 1972 Biscayne sedan cost $3,074 with the Turbo-Thrift Six, and $3,408 with the V8. At $3,713, the Catalina sedan cost some 10% more than a V8 Biscayne.
Inside, however, the Catalina probably was a more pleasant place to be. Catalina coupes and sedans got cloth-and-Morrokide upholstery, while convertibles and station wagons featured more weather- and kid-friendly all-Morrokide seating.
The upholstery on our CC looks quite comfortable to me, even 40 years after it was sewn together. Offering even more comfort and status was the previously mentioned Catalina Brougham, which returned for 1972.
As you’d expect, the Brougham sported fancier interior trim with carpeted lower door panels, a deluxe steering wheel, clock, full wheel covers and color-keyed exterior door-handle inserts. In addition, Brougham identification graced the sail panels. Running about $200 higher than a comparable standard Catalina, it wasn’t a big seller, with only 8,007 sedans, 8,762 four-door hardtops and 10,545 two-door hardtops finding buyers–a drop in the bucket compared with the nearly 200,000 regular Catalinas sold that year. The Brougham was nowhere to be found when the 1973 Pontiacs were introduced.
Nineteen seventy-two was also the last year for the Catalina convertible. The $4,080 drop-top sold just 2,399 copies. The Grand Ville would keep Pontiac’s B-body convertible flame alive through 1975.
As you might have surmised from my previous CC articles, I do have a thing for full-size 1970s Pontiacs. While my favorite is the 1979 Bonneville that my dad owned, I also like the 1971-76s. This cool instrument panel is one reason why. Unlike most other big 1970s gunboats, the Pontiacs had round gauges instead of the strip-type speedometers seen on just about everything else. I also liked these steering wheels, with just enough trim to let you know you’re in an uplevel car.
The Catalina’s standard powerplant was a two-barrel, 175-hp 400, but those who wanted more engine could specify a four-barrel 400, or choose a two- or four-barrel 455 V8. The power figures I found were a bit confusing, but apparently there were 200-hp and 250-hp four-barrel 400s; 185-hp and 200-hp two-barrel 455s; and 220-hp 250-hp four-barrel 455s. It seems that the higher figures were achieved with the optional-at-$40 dual exhausts.
I was very happy to find this solid model 2L69 Catalina sedan in downtown Rock Island, just a few blocks from the office. This 4,154 lb. land yacht is one of 83,004 Catalina sedans built in ’72. This one is very nice indeed, and an original Nebraska car according to the current owner.
This is a solid, original car, right down to the original wheel covers and whitewalls. The only rust on the car is some minor surface rust on the sides, as you can see in this photo. A little judicious polishing, and this car would be just the ticket for one of the local cruise-ins. If I wasn’t working only part-time right now, I’d have been severely tempted. A nice, honest car, and that light green is so Seventies. Were all ’70s cars green or brown? It sure seems like it, judging by the survivors I see these days.
As with the 1975 Fleetwood Brougham, these cars appeared to be styled, and not designed according to key hard points, focus groups or engineers. Even this four-door sedan looks good to me. Hopefully whoever buys this beauty will love it as much as I do. As the saying goes, they’re only original once.
Wow, I have not seen one of these in eons. This car is the same color as the 72 Cutlass Supreme that my mother picked out. Oldsmobile called it Pinehurst green, for some reason. Actually, it was always one of my least favorite colors.
I had never noticed the difference in the front end designs on these vs. the 71s. Quite a difference. The rear was always the weakest part of the design to me. Particularly in a light color, where the body seams showed up the huge rectangular panels that contained the taillights. The other B bodies did a much better job of integrating taillights into the body.
We had neighbors with one of these, A brown one, of course. I also had a music teacher who had a 72 Catalina 2 door – also brown. She was a teeny little lady in her 60s who would recruit 7th or 8th grade boys in her classes to go to her house to rake leaves for pay a couple of times in the fall. I rode in the back, and it was funny to watch that little tiny old lady drive that massive 2 door Pontiac.
I’ve become slightly jealous after reading through comments such as yours. When the cars of your youth are these big, unashamed, American sedans I think it is likely to leave a lasting, (and more often than not, apparently) positive impression on you. I grew up in the back seats of a skin-tone K-car wagon, an ’87 Taurus that, while cool-looking, never ran, a Plymouth Grand Voyager with fake wood siding, and a Honda Accord. None of these cars tug at my heartstrings the way a lot of these old American full-sizers seem to do for you guys. I suppose there are pluses and minuses for vehicles of all ages, but “Catalina” says more to me than “Aires.”
You bring up an interesting point. You are correct that I grew up and remember seeing/riding in new cars from the mid 1960s on, and at least some of them bring an emotional tug. Many older ones were around, and I liked those even better. I have always wondered (and supposed) that younger generations would feel the same way about a Celebrity or a Lumina as I felt about an Impala a generation earlier. But maybe not. Perhaps not enough time has passed. In the 70s or 80s, there would have been few cars that interested me less than today’s 72 Catalina. Or perhaps there is something missing from the newer cars that make even young readers who never lived with them interested more in the older ones. Many young folks of my experience (high school and college age) love 1960s-70s rock music, and some even go back to classic jazz from the era before.
Maybe this topic calls for a CC essay – is it a generational thing, or did I live through the tail end of a unique era of the American car that will not be easily followed. I have no answers, just questions.
“Maybe this topic calls for a CC essay…”
Shameless Self-Promotion Dept 😉 :
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1973-imperial-lebaron-by-chrysler/
To Spidey’s point, I think there are two related reasons ’70s and earlier cars are still interesting, even to people who never experienced them firsthand.
1) The dawn-of-the-’80s “extinction event” that turned the typical car into a front-driver with a transverse 4 or V6. Styling also became much more practical and restrained. That basic template still holds, so a boring Taurus or K-car is still boring today. But mass-market rear-drive cars with straight sixes or V8s, plus idiosyncratic styling that changed every year, only become more exotic as time passes.
2) The same tech advances that make modern cars better in every way also make them harder for amateurs to work on. I’ve recently put new power steering hoses on the Imp. I wouldn’t even attempt that job on my daily driver Mazda3. As we all spend more and more time online and onscreen, a “wrenchable” analog ride is appealing…as long you don’t need to drive it every day and in the snow. 🙂
I was a kid in the 1980’s and I remember seeing a lot of full size 70’s GM iron like this around. In my own family before 1985 I was familiar through family with 1972 Cadillac deVille, Buick Electra, Buick Centurion, and Chevy Impala. In the 80’s my family drove all used cars, we had a 62 Oldsmobile as our family car followed by a 74 Cougar, and then ended the decade in an 84 Sedan deVille. My grandma had only one brand new car in her life…an 89 Dodge Aries, which replaced a 7x Ford Granada, so I love K-Cars too! But most of my friends and cousins grew up with Toyota-Honda-Nissans, Taurii, & Minivans. I am 35, and I now find myself nostalgic for most pre 1989 cars, but I have a hard time thinking of any post 1990 car as old! But then that’s why I like coming here. There are so many kindred spirits here. In the 1980’s during the great Testarossa-Countach-Porsche era when it seemed like all boys had these poster cars on their wall(I must confess to having a Testarossa poster) I had pinned up Cadillacs, Lincolns, and even a Grand Marquis on my walls. I was surprised to find so many mid 30’s contemporaries confessing here to collecting 80’s advertising and being in love with Brougham era landyachts.
There is a certain something to 70’s American cars, especially the biggies. They represent the last bastion of “bigger is better” America, cars designed when were sending 10 story rockets to the moon and buidling the massive 747. by the mid-70’s the realities started to set in and cars were no longer designed along the “anything goes” motto ever again.
You’re not (completely) correct. I didn’t see any 10-story rockets, and wasn’t even born when the 747 was designed. I’m not even American. But even I like land barges. I like the straight-8 Roadmasters *better*, but still. There is more at work here than US-specific sentiment or nostalgia.
I’m speaking more about the era that these cars were designed in rather than what your reffering to.
There never was an displacement too big or a wheelbase too long to be considered.
> There never was an displacement too big or a wheelbase too long to be considered.
Great line!
*sigh* I should’ve used my name as my avatar (I’m Matthew, but it’s okay to forget since I usually don’t have anything constructive to add anyways). Anyways, it probably is not a coincidence that as GM’s Deadly Sins started hitting the dealers with the frequency of gatling gun fire, my generation (I’m 31 this year) probably ended up having less to aspire to. Let’s face it, a mid 80s Celebrity or K-car is simply not a late 60s/early 70s Coronet (those things came with 440s!), or Impala or any of the other interesting cars that I’ve seen here whose names I cannot remember. And another thing, by the time the 90s rolled around, everyone was trying to copy the Japanese, and since 2000, everyone has been trying to copy BMW. I have doubts pertaining to the wisdom of chasing someone else’s identity, too. So, I’ll be a little jealous of your memories, and while I do love those old sedans (the Broughams, not as much, but still), I have greatly enjoyed the string of Subarus that have served me.
“(I’m Matthew, but it’s okay to forget since I usually don’t have anything constructive to add anyways).”
Bite your tongue, son. EVERYONE on here has something CONSTRUCTIVE and VALUABLE to say and share, especially when it comes to cars.
Those of us who are older (I’m 61) and who talk about the glamorous cars of our youths whether in the 40’s. 50’s. 60’s or even the 70’s, there’s always interesting conversation to be enjoyed by all! I especially enjoy hearing what floats younger car lover’s boats, because many cars of more recent vintage don’t interest me in the slightest, but learning what peaks a younger person’s automotive enthusiasm, well, that’s what makes horse races and a fascinating web site such as this!
Besides, you younger guys keep me on my toes!
“Bite your tongue, son. EVERYONE on here has something CONSTRUCTIVE and VALUABLE to say and share, especially when it comes to cars.”
+1! The geezer speaks the truth! (I say that with the utmost respect, Z. Also, I turn 40 next year, won’t be able to make old jokes much longer. 🙂 )
Maybe it’s the sheer “presence” of these cars. I’ve been blessed to have owned and/or driven some very fast cars in my life: my ’73 B & E-body cars definitely aren’t the fastest of the bunch but they feel so much more powerful than the smaller/lighter stuff. The occasional “Italian Tune-Up” in my beater 400-2bbl ’73 Bonneville is every bit as gratifying as the same activity in the current 300hp LT1 junk in the driveway.
It is hard to put into words but the 747 is an excellent analogy. My coolest flight memories are the takeoffs & especially the thrust-reverser engagements in the old 747s.
Funny, brings back memories to the 1990’s, where I drove around and enjoyed my 1970’s car whilst watching the frequent touch-downs and take-offs by KLM training their 747 pilots at the local airport.
I practically lived at the end of the runway.
Last time I had the joy of flying in one, was in 2005 to L.A. and back.
Pontiac called this color Springfield Green. It’s actually a shade or two lighter than Pinehurst Green. The vinyl top is Covert Tan.
I recently was family gifted a 72 Catalina two-Dr Ht 400-2. 14,700 Actual Miles. In Secure storage Since 2001. Garaged Kept by Original Owner Since Purchased. new. .extensive PMD Dealer Docs..Owning to Health Issues and advancing Age Im Putting the car on the Market. Pristine Original Condition CELL 540 672 8879, Vinton VA
Don Email keardk@aol.com.
This is classic – this is just the kind of car that was so common on America’s streets 35 years ago. I haven’t seen one this solid in probably 25 years.
…If you wanted rubber floor mats, a six-cylinder engine and no chrome gewgaws, you were, sadly, plain out of luck. The Catalina sedan may have been the cheapest big Pontiac, but it still boasted a two-barrel, 400 cu in V8, automatic transmission,…
In the Great White North, the Canadian Laurentian (who’s the counterpart of the Catalina) was available with the 350 ci V8.
Or in the even cheaper Stratochief. My dad had one with a Chevrolet 350, Powerglide and not a single other option. It even had armstrong steering, making it impossible for mom to parallel park.
Interestingly, it had the same wheel covers as the featured car.
Some books show the Catalina in the US as having the 350 as the standard engine, depending on the year. It is somewhat odd to me that the Pontiac would have the 400 standard, while the supposedly “upmarket” Delta 88 and Buick LeSabre had 350s.
As I was reading the article, I was thinking that if Pontiac hadn’t yet gone to the 350 as the base engine in the Catalina, they must have done so soon after this. I thought it was before the energy crisis, not in reaction to it. IINM, Olds and Buick had once similarly offered only large-displacement V8s in their full-size cars, before moving to a smaller-displacement engine for their lower-priced full-size models.
While the Catalina had the 389/400 standard for many years, it was a 2bbl version. This was probably not much more powerful than 350 2bbls in other cars, and probably less powerful than 350 4bbls. So even though it was a 389 or 400, it was in a sense no better than, and maybe even inferior to, a 350. From a modern perspective it seems odd to make an engine with that large of a displacement in a 2bbl version. I guess in the days when middle-priced makes focused on just one size of car (e.g., late ’50s/early ’60s), and fuel economy wasn’t really a concern, it made sense to put a large-displacement V8 in everything, with a detuned version for cheaper models, rather than make a separate smaller-displacement engine. Once the A-body intermediates were introduced in 1964, it became necessary for these brands to offer a smaller-displacement V8, but the B-O-P full-size lines stuck with the old way of doing things for several more years.
IIRC, Olds was the first middle-price GM division to offer a smaller-displacement V8s in a full-size car, in the 1964 Jetstar 88. I don’t think it was until several years later that all Olds B-bodies came with the 350 standard, however.
The Chevy Caprice also followed the “large-displacement engine with a 2bbl” pattern in the late ’60s/early ’70s, presumably in imitation of its GM siblings. IIMN, there was a 2bbl version of the 396/small-block 400 that was available only in Caprices (not in other full-size Chevys). It was originally optional, with a smaller 2bbl V8 standard, but was the base engine for two or three years in the early ’70s.
MCT: read this: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/almost-forgotten-the-20-mpg-400-cubic-inch-1967-olds-cutlass-turnpike-cruiser/
Pontiac was doing the same thing with their 2 barrel 389/400 engines. Two barrel engine make quite a lot of sense, because they allow the engine to be driven with lower manifold vacuum, increasing efficiency. It’s an old concept that’s been around for a long time, and Pontiac was putting it to use. There’s no good reason to think a 350 would have been more efficient, at least to any material degree.
A two barrel carb does not allow the engine to run at a lower vacuum. At any given rpm and HP level a engine needs a given amount of air flow and fuel. It is the steep gears that cause the engine to run at a lower vacuum since the engine will need to operate at a higher volumetric efficiency to make the HP. That means it needs to be throttled less.
The 4bbl, particularly a spread bore like the Q-jet, actually ends up being more efficient if set up right. To create the same vacuum the throttle plates are closer to being fully open. That means the throttle plates are not in the way of the fuel flow which prevents the fuel from dropping out of suspension as it hits the plates. It also means that the air flow through that smaller venturi is actually at a higher velocity again giving a more homogenous mixture. That means that the carb can actually be jetted slightly leaner w/o the worry of a lean misfire in some cylinders.
In the 70’s GM actually made the 4bbl standard on increasingly smaller engines because of that fact. Since the secondaries are vacuum operated they normally don’t even come into play. IH also used a spread bore carb (Thermoquad) to get the Scout II with the 345 to turn in a 20 MPG EPA (old method) HWY rating which exceeded that of the 304 with it’s two barrel. The other reason is the better distribution of that leaner mixture also gave them lower emissions.
Did these 345 & 392 engines have spread bore intakes or were adapters used? Just curious.
The ones equipped with the Thermoquad had a proper spread bore intake. It’s only the final machining that differs between 2bbl, square and spread bore 4bbl intakes for the 345/392.
Cool. Thanks for the info.
Pontiac in this era did have the 400 as their standard block on the FULL SIZE cars . . . . (evolved from the 389); mid sizers had the 350.
About the time this car was new, I had a paper route and saw a brand-new ’73 model full size Pontiac. Appears this was someone visiting San Rafael (California), and while this guy was washing his coupe, he popped the hood and then I saw an ORANGE engine. Riding closer, I was introduced to my first in-the-flesh Canadian Pontiac. (The guy was visiting relatives and drove the car from Ontario). Laurentian coupe. As time progressed, it seemed like the Laurentian/Catalina became closer in trim and pieces (except for the Chevy drivetrains), whereas Laurentians resembled some of the Catalina DNA, but had Chevy Bel-Air like interiors, Chevy steering wheels, columns, brake and accelerator pedals, mirrors and so on.
One of my high school buddies would borrow his parents’ ’72 Catalina Safari and we’d “launch” that car – it had the 455 four-barrel. Zoom!
I thought the Strato-Chief was the equivalent of the Biscayne and the Laurentian was the equivalent of the Bel Air? Or was that true at one time, but everything was shifted a notch upward at some point, making the Strato-Chief the equivalent of the Bel Air and the Laurentian the equivalent of the Impala/Catalina?
When were the Strato-Chief and Laurentian discontinued? Was the Catalina name ever used in Canada?
EDIT: Wikipedia indicates that, at least in the ’60s, Strato-Chief = Biscayne, Laurentian = Bel Air, Parisienne = Impala, and Grand Parisienne = Caprice. It suggests, however, that the relationship to U.S. models could be complex, e.g., a mid ’60s Laurentian has exterior trim similar to a Catalina, and even some features from a Star Chief, both of which I would see as further up the hierarchy of GM fullsize models than the Bel Air was.
The last time then the Laurentian name was used was around 1980-1981. The Strato-Chief was discountinued earlier. The 1969 Canadian line-up still listed the Strato-Chief and the 2+2 http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/Canada/1969%20Pontiac%20Brochure/1969%20Cdn%20Pontiac%20Brochure-g.html
A surviving Canadian 2+2 with the Chevrolet 396 or 427 engines is a rare bread.
Strato Chiefs in Canada were nixed for the ’71 lineup. It seems (at least based on period advertisements) that the full U.S. lineup of Pontiacs were being advertised (but perhaps, not necessarily stocked unless special ordered). Aubrey Bruneau’s excellent website and the Old Car Project features period pre auto-pact ads that list “Strato Chief, Laurentian, Parisienne, Catalina, Bonneville, Grand-Prix.” (1964). Pre-auto pact duties on these had to have cost big Canadian bucks – same reason why in Canadian Pontiacs (and Chevies) . . . 409’s and pre-auto pact 396/427 Chevy blocks were seldom ordered. The Tonawanda, New York engines were subject to the duty/tariff. The St. Catherines, Ontario engines (small blocks and sixes) were not.
I had a ’72 Bonneville. I always wondered about the red dot hubcaps that year. We’re buyers supposed to be reminded of Packard? (Or Marmon?)
I don’t know but I sure miss the colored lucite(?) emblems on these old wheelcovers. In ’73, Pontiac went with the el-cheapo paper-thin Aluminum embossed glue-on centers. The red arrowhead faded in no time.
For the “whale sized” B-bodys the Pontiacs looked pretty good. They seemed to wear the extra size the best.
Yeah, I could imagine Bill Hickman driving one of these Catalinas like he drived a 1973 Bonneville in the car chase scene in the movie “The Seven-ups”. 😉 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vACWV5sRcY&feature=related
That was Grand Ville, a loaded up one to, with cornering lamps.
The chase scene in The Seven-Ups was amusing. Made Starsky and Hutch’s Torino look like a good handling car. Plus I love it when Hollywood finds it necessary to have double-clutching going on in an automatic. That was one fast Fiat 850!
I read somewhere they used sound clips from “Bullitt”. You’ll hear the guy shifting the 4-speed in the Ventura…oh wait…the Ventura is an automatic.
This is a particularly painful chase scene to watch…that beautiful new GrandVille was beat to a pulp.
That’s what was cool about it, seeing new car trashed, instead of cutting from a new car to an old one blowing up, as on cheap TV shows. And its a car getting abused, not an animal
On a more positive side, it wasn’ blowed up like the Charger in Bullitt (the Challenger in Vanishing Point was substitued by a 1968-69 Camaro) or being crashed by a old truck like the red Plymouth Valiant sedan in Duel or even doing a rollover like that Impala in “McQ” who was John Wayne’s first cop movie. 😉
Wait a minute…the Valiant in the movie “Duel” was red? I thought it was gray…oh, wait, I only saw it on a black & white TV. Never saw it in color.
Better fate than the Ventura . . . . . of course, Popeye Doyle’s commandeering of a ’71 LeMans wasn’t any better . . .
Totally agree… at least in these years (’71-’72) the Pontiacs were definitely the most successful at hiding the heft of the biggest-ever B-body.
In 1987 or 1988, a neighbor bought a ’72 Bonneville. Yes, it was old, but it had 30,000 miles on it and the original owners kept it in the garage under quilts and rarely used it.
Their Bonny was a green four-door hardtop equipped with a 4 bbl 455. It was also loaded up more than any other full-size GM I’ve seen of this vintage. It was a time capsule. For some reason I want to say their’s was a darker green than this one.
My neighbors drove it some….they said it would pass anything but a gas station and it got 9 mpg regardless of how it was driven. They later traded it in on a Camry. Sad.
It’s obvious that, in the 1970’s, despite the lip-service paid to the idea that “you can’t get a young man to drive an old man’s car”; GM management were way more comfortable turning out old-fart bulgemobiles than something that would be appreciated by the late-20’s, early-30’s crowd (as back then, they could actually afford them).
Probably had a lot to do with the earlier GM edict that division management were to be issued cars from the brand they were managing, and not Cadillacs. Well, if they couldn’t get a Cadillac, they’d come out with a car that would at least let them feel like they were driving a Cadillac.
The late 20’s early 30’s crowd was more interested in the GTO, LeMans Sport and Firebirds in the same showroom.
Surely more than lip-service!
According to John DeLorean’s account, the corporation’s big priority was attempting to increase profits by minimizing costs and pushing volume, which generally entailed making the different iterations of each platform more and more alike in everything but styling and trim. A lot of Pontiac’s identity as the ‘happening’ young brand image faded quickly after Knudsen, Pete Estes, DeLorean, and Jim Wangers departed (which was before this car went on sale). Some of the stunts that had built that image, like the GTO, didn’t jibe with the corporation’s policies and focus, but the corporation had generally let it slide as long as it was selling well.
Even if Estes or DeLorean had been around longer (which wasn’t the way GM usually worked in those days), the sporty car thing had mostly run its course when these cars appeared. By the early seventies, a new GTO was not really priced within the reach of a typical 20something: optioning a GTO (or Firebird) with all the stuff that makes modern auction buyers ooh and aah pushed the price close to $5,000, on top of which you could end up paying $1,200 or more a year on insurance. That was a major reason the Firebird and GTO were dying on the vine by ’72 — Pontiac sold fewer than 29,000 Firebirds and Trans Ams that year.
Though 7 years later Pontiac was selling more than 100K Trans Am’s a year, not even counting Esprits, Formulas and etc. Pontiac had a hit and mis-decade through the 70’s, the Grand Prix was huge from 1969 and up, the Firebirds rebounded by the end of the 70’s, but the mid-size cars never got over their awkward colonade re-style from 1973 and big car buyers moved elsewhere either within GM or outside.
I guess what helped the Firebird was, along with the Camaro, the last guy remaining in town with the retirement of the Barracuda/Challenger, AMC Javelin, Mustang morphed into Mustang II and on the other side, the free publicity the Firebird got with the tv series “The Rockford Files” when James Garner drive a Firebird Esprit and the movie “Smokie & the Bandit”.
Some autos historians think then the 1973 Grand Am was originally planned to be the GTO. I scanned these pictures of mock-up clays and/or prototypes of the 1973 Pontiac LeMans/Grand Am/GTO from the October 2009 issue of Collectible Automobile, some of these clays was mysteriously badged as Firebird. Did Pontiac once studied to move the Firebird to another role like Mercury did with the Cougar?
Yeah, the Firebird/Trans Am rose again, but the numbers for the early part of the decade were pretty dismal. I can see why Pontiac execs of this time wouldn’t have high hopes.
As I understand it, sales of the Camaro and Firebird were artifically depressed in 1972 due to a UAW strike. So while sales of these models had certainly declined sharply from where they had been in the late ’60s, as had all ponycars, those ’72 numbers probably make things look worse than they actually were.
On the other hand, I’ve been told that GM supposedly contemplated resolving the strike by simply dropping the F-bodies. (There was also apparently an issue around partially assembled cars abandoned on the assembly line needing to be scrapped because they would not be up to regulatory standards for the 1973 model year. So cleaning up from the strike was going to cost GM money even before they incurred the anticipated costs to set the ’73s in motion.) This may tie in with Stephane’s earlier comment about A-body mockups being badged as Firebirds. Maybe if the F-bodies had been dropped, the Firebird name would have moved to what we know as the Grand Am, not unlike what Mercury did with the Cougar name a year later.
I think F-body sales did stabilize during the 1974-75 recession in part because they were the only traditional ponycars left. Even if that market had shrunk, what was left of it gravitated to the Camaro and Firebird. (Another factor is that the recession was driven by the energy crisis — sales of large cars were affected much more than small cars; many of the latter even saw their sales increase — and by American standards of that time an F-body was a relatively small, fuel-efficient car, at least in six-cylinder form. If F-body sales didn’t increase much, they didn’t decline much, either.) From 1976 onward, however, there was clearly renewed interest in this type of vehicle, and once again the F-bodies were the only ones left.
I understand that the F bodies left idle on the assembly lines at Van Nuys and Norwood, were simply re-serialized and marketed in Canada and overseas where the emission standards, etc, were not as stringent. I also understand that there were a good number of cars that had to be destroyed since they couldn’t flood inventories (even outside America) with cars not ordered . . . Good thing GM never resorted to the “car bank” like Chrysler in the late ’70s. Flooding supplies of cars not being ordered (but building them anyway).
We had a ’71 four door with the 2bbl 400 and automatic. White with blue interior. Was my grandparent’s car that they gave to us when they switched to Mercury after a long string of Pontiacs.
Our ’68 Country Squire wagon (380, 4bbl) had way more guts – I remember thinking the Cat should have been able to ‘move out’ better than it did.
Mom drove it after my parents divorced, but sold it not long after and replaced with a more fuel-efficient, albeit less reliable Citation.
Part of that may have been that Pontiac tended to put very low (numerical) axle ratios on the Catalina, in order to improve fuel efficiency with its relatively big 400 standard motor. That worked pretty well on the highway, but not so great at the stoplight.
Yeah, even in the early sixties, I think some Catalinas with automatic ended up with 2.56 axles. Shades of the Olds Turnpike Cruiser concept…
Yep. A buddy of mine has a ’65 Grand Prix with a 2.56 rear, strangely enough it also has a posi.
Those tall axles were just great. Not many guys buying a big sled have much interest in the stoplight grand prix anyway. Most were middle aged people who drive much like I do. I tend to like to come off a light a little faster than most and then make some space around me. The big 400 would have one helluva a hole shot by the standards of any small four banger of today. These motors make huge torque by today’s standards and held onto it forever. A short axle is opposite to the concept of these cars: big, heavy, powerful cars that will glide down the Interstate. They also braked and handled surprisingly well. Like all American stuff of the era, however, you’ll start doing a lot of wrenching almost right away. These things didn’t even have electronic ignition, a real oversight for the time and emblematic of Detroit being just plain cheap.
Nothing, and I mean nothing, would saunter down the Interstate like these big old sleds from GM. By this point they had the whole engine/transmission/brakes thing pretty much in hand and in ’72 emissions weren’t much of a problem either. Even with the lower compression motors, they still felt very, very healthy indeed, mostly because the thing made like 300 lb/ft of torque practically off the line.
Great cars from a bygone era, one of 455 V-8s and four barrel carbs that roared when you stomped on it!
Electronic ignition wasn’t exactly common in 72.
If you want to talk about being cheap and not going electronic ignition you need to look at the Japanese vehicles they brought it to the US much later than Chrysler GM and Ford and kept points at home for a couple of decades more. Well into the 90’s I kept getting the “low mileage” imported from Japan engines that had points distributors.
I agree with a little bit of everything said above. Being in my 40’s I became car obsessed in the late 60’s-early 70’s when my mother drove home a 69 Grand Prix SJ and my father followed with a 70 Torino GT Fastback. So I agree that some part of the allure is due to exposure to these cars when new and their place in time. This was also the era before pre-cookie cutter car designs and before the advancement of numerous GM Deadly Sins coupled with the advent of awful plastic filled interiors so I guess nostalgia goes a long way. I will admit I still suffer from Brougham-itis as my own first cc was a mint 76 Seville and my current cc is a pristine 1980 Cutluss Supreme Coupe/ Brougham finished in pastel beige with toffee top and two tone mocha/toffee interior and with 35k documented miles. I love my new Malibu but when I back the Cutluss out of the driveway and cruise down the road in pillow top seat comfort with the 260 V8(I can already hear the comments but I do love it)purring and I’m in heaven–I literally get comments everywhere I go. Call it nostalgia or senility..but I just prefer to be different..
I know exactly what you mean. I few years ago I had a ’79 Cutlass Supreme Brougham with low miles, white with black striped plush interior, and that same 260 V8. It wasn’t fast, but it was wonderful. Smooth, extremely quiet and comfortable, and just the right size. I didn’t get a lot of comments on it, but I think I bought to too early. Even 10 years ago, these didn’t quite seem “classic” yet. It definitely seemed classy, though. I regret selling it.
Nice. The Olds community shuns the little 260V8 but I always thought they were great reliable engines. I’d love to have an original 260-powered Supreme Brougham, Calais, or Supreme in that order..ideally some combination of green & white.
Please please PLEASE can we see some pics of it???
Everyone here knows that my all-time favorite car is the Cutlass Supreme Brougham!
I am detailing it this weekend and will get some pics. Like Chris said they are just nice comfortable cars and pefect size-it’s only a foot longer than my 2011 Malibu. But the chrome, that half vinyl top-the I always liked how the trunk line ran up into the rear quarter panel and curved down under the rear side window. The weekend I found the Cutluss there was a 79 Gran Prix in the same color scheme with buckets and t-tops complete with the honey comb wheels-it was a tough choice!
Tom; excellent Clue! Even I couldn’t figure it out, although I knew what car it was for, until I looked at all the pictures.
The building in front of which the featured car was photographed matches the article’s subject perfectly. Excellent example of late-American modernism and if it weren’t for those two trucks next to that beautiful Pontiac, that first picture could’ve very easily been taken in 1972.
I had the same thought, the late building and the car work well together,
Herb Smith lead claims adjuster parks his 72 Catalina at World Wide Underwritters headquarters in Torrance Ca.
That’s the Modern Woodmen building. I interviewed there back in 2011 (didn’t get the job though) and the interior is just as cool. No ’70s or ’80s remodeling in the first and second floor common areas-lots of marble. There are great views of the Mississippi River on the other side, as it was built on top of the levee that was constructed after the flood of ’65.
The Catalina infront of that great mid-mod office building almost looks like a screen shot from a Quinn Martin production.
That building when new seemed so very modern, even “Jetson – esque” in a way, very snazzy for an old river town like Rock Island. Another new building nearby was the Rock Island Sheraton (now a Holiday Inn?). Anyway, iit ‘s a perfect backdrop for the Pontiac…
Cool old car a model seldom seen here it has no performance cache so noone imports them
My mom had a dark green four door 1972 with the 455. As a kid, I loved the car and I know she did too as it was one of the cars we kept for more than a year.
Very comfortable.
Could you imagine today if every model car came with a convertible option?
Just yesterday, I had a chat with my neighbor, (five years my senior) about 60’s and 70’s cars. We both agreed that this time of year was very exciting. New cars were exciting. He told me of his mother buying a new 60 Lincoln and other cars.
Back in 72, I’d have thought that Catalina was ho-hum. A 2 door would have been better. Now I love it.
I saw some sort of bloated new roadster today. I could live with it, but it really wasn’t exciting.
My supervisor at the time had a ’72 Catalina that was even the same color as the featured car. I remember him complaining a lot about water leaks in the rear window area…not much else. He traded it in 1976 or 1977 for a Datsun B-210 fastback that was the same pale metallic green – and the ivory vinyl top. Ech.
I think its fascinating how many cars of this era make no attempt to have the radio controls accessible to the front passenger. The way the dash is oriented only to the driver says “keep your hands and eyes off my dashboard…”
My favorite was the 69 Ford Galaxie/LTD that put the radio to the driver’s left. It probably became the favorite car of parents of teenagers everywhere. 🙂
There’s a missed opportunity for an ad tagline: “We’ve got your generation gap right here.”
I laugh whenever I see this in 70’s cars, my own Buick Estate Wagon included, with its air conditioning controls on the left of the steering column, next to the headlights and wiper controls, where NO ONE but the driver would have access to it, this was common in the full size GM cars in the 70’s, with the exception of the Pontiac from this article, the “driver only” a/c controls were on Chevrolets, Oldsmobiles, Buicks and Cadillacs through 1976, and on the E-body through 78. I think the Camaro still had the a/c controls on the left through 1981. I cant imagine how badly a car maker would be roasted alive today if they placed the a/c controls on the drivers side of the dash.
This feature outlived the Brougham Epoch in at least one car family – Omnirizons put the HVAC controls left of the driver.
What a beautiful car. The Pontiacs seem to be the rarest ’71-76 full-size GMs, so it’s nice to see one. The ’71 and ’72 are the rarest of the breed, from what I’ve seen. I wouldn’t say these are the most beautiful (I love the ’71-’72 Delta 88 styling, especially) but they hold their own quite well, and I like them better than the Chevrolets and Buicks.
I find these rather plain looking compared to my favorite 60-64 Pontiacs, I recall several of these from my teenage years owned by parents of my school classmates.
I think these Pontiacs had the ability to tolate extreme levels of rust. Gaping holes with chunks of iron oxide hanging around the edges wouldn’t faze these boats, whereas a unibody car like a Dodge Dart or a Vega would have already broken in half. They just kept on chugging along into the early ’90s.
I don’t know why, but I think these cars are quite handsome still. Despite their woes and well, huge-ness, they still come across as clean and crisp.
This was an incredible find Tom, great work!
Car Buddy Zach and I crossed the country in his ’71 Cat in 1995. Our itinerary was that we spent extra time anyplace the thing broke down. Flint, MI and Rawlins, WY. Gotta hit him up for some pics and get ’em up here…
Wow, that takes me back. We had a ’75 Catalina in this same color with the white vinyl top and matching pea green interior. It was spacious and reliable. I have no idea what it got for mileage or what motor was in it, I was too young at the time to know anything other than it was a V8. I always thought it was a nice car but a horrible color. We had it for quite some time, my sister even went off to college in it.
That and the ’83 Caprice Classic wagon that replaced it are still my gold standard as to what a comfortable ride should be. Handling, not so much. But they seemed a lot better suited to our rough midwestern roads than most of today’s cars, which handle well but ride like buckboards in comparison.
While I like these tanks, it shows that DeLorean was not in charge anymore. Instead of Pontiac being its own identity, they were aiming at other GM divisions. Catalina at Impalas, and the Gran Villes at Olds/Buick. Bonneville was lost in the shuffle, but cooler head prevailed and made it top of the line again for 1976+
And all the people dismissing the size, these are smaller than any average SUV today.
How true!
Great writeup on a very nice example of another one of my favorite vehicles. This shade of green is one of my favorites and it’s seldom to see one not faded.
I never understood why Pontiac offered a Brougham for the Catalina when they had the Bonneville to bridge the gap to the GrandVille. I’m kind of glad they did cancel it because the Bonneville did not sell well the following year anyway. They built 206,649 Catalinas (!!), 72,502 GrandVilles, but only 46,898 Bonnevilles.
My second car was a Golden Olive ’73 Bonneville coupe and it was what got me obsessed with these things. I’d give anything to get it back but it’s no doubt destroyed by now. These two guys are getting me by for now. I reluctantly admit that the ’72 front end is a cleaner design….although any ’71-’73 Pontiac is pretty to me.
That’s a nice pair of ’73s. I remember a light yellow ’73 Grand Ville 4-door hardtop down the street from a friend of mine, back around 1990-91. I thought that was a really nice looking car, even though it was a bit worn out and rusty, even back then. That car is probably why the ’73 Grand Ville is a favorite of mine to this day.
Thanks Tom. I really enjoy owning them. It’s amazing how option combinations on the same model car make for a very different driving experience! Back then the buyer actually had a choice & could have his new car built exactly how he wished. For example, the original owner of my blue car paid an additional $119 for the non-factory light blue color.
By 1976, Catalinas were plainer, with round headlights, compared to Bonnevilles with ‘modern’ square bulbs. Thus more rare, since it seemed like a Chevy Impala, for more money. Kind of how the Caprice started selling more, the Bonne did too, especially after ’77.
I think this is very true. As with Chevy, I think it was a combination of placing market emphasis on the higher-priced model, and the effect of the energy crisis on the lower-priced model’s traditional customer base. A lot of Impala and Catalina customers either moved down to something smaller like a Malibu or LeMans (“It’ll get better gas mileage”) or, if they wanted to stay with a full-size, were induced to move up to the Caprice and Bonneville (“It’s so broughamy!”).
The Bonneville had accounted for a larger proportion of full-size Pontiac sales in the late ’60s/early ’70s than the Caprice did of full-size Chevy sales. This continued to be true as sales shifted to the Bonneville; by the end of the ’70s the Catalina was really becoming a marginal model, kind of like the Executive had been back in the late ’60s.
My [girl] cousin had a used 74 Catalina four door, with 400 2 bbl, and it was nothing ‘performance oriented’ at all. It was very similar to Chevy BelAir and Biscayne ‘taxicab’ post sedans in character.
She bought it since she had to buy something on the spot to get to new job the next day. Mostly it run rough from all the emmisions equipment clogging. Needed tune ups every 10k miles. Once she found a good mechanic it ran OK, but was a hog, since this was during the 79-80 gas crunch. Now drives Corollas.
Our family had a 1972 Grand Ville two door hardtop with the 455 4-bbl and duals. The color was Brittany Beige.
One day after my mom dropped me off at school, a pickup truck side-swiped it. Amazingly, the front fender didn’t deform — it shattered. It was made of fiberglass! A classmate of mine grabbed a bucket and filled it with pieces of the Pontiac’s fender.
I wonder if the fiberglass front fenders were common to all these Pontiacs, or if it was a limited production run.
I kept the car for many years after my folks were done with it, selling it at auction in 1998.
“With models like the Grand Ville, was Pontiac trying to become more junior Buick than premium Chevrolet?…The Grand Ville’s introduction moved the storied Bonneville down a step, into the slot left by the recently departed Executive series…Joining the standard Catalina was a new Catalina Brougham series, which effectively replaced the Ventura as a Catalina with a little more gingerbread….Closed Grand Ville models (a convertible was also available) were set apart from other B-body Pontiacs by roof lines shared with the C-body Oldses, Buicks and Cadillacs. Grand Villes like this ’72 four-door hardtop enjoy the distinction of being the only GM B-bodies with C-body roofs….Although no longer the top-drawer Pontiac, the Bonneville was still quite nice, and also quite popular….Meantime, Pontiac dropped the Bonneville drop-top in favor of the Grand Ville convertible…[the Catalina Brougham] wasn’t a big seller…The Brougham was nowhere to be found when the 1973 Pontiacs were introduced.”
I’ve always been a litle unclear on the purpose of the reshuffling of Pontiac’s full-size line in 1971. One way of looking at it is that the Grand Ville replaced the Bonneville; the Bonneville in turn was moved down to replace the Executive; and the Catalina Brougham took the place of the Catalina’s former Ventura option package.
Another way of looking at is that the Grand Ville represented a more upscale model than Pontiac had previously sold, a step in the direction of the Olds and Buick C-bodies; Pontiac decided to move the Bonneville onto the shorter Catalina wheelbase to greater differentiate the Grand Ville from the Bonneville; now that the Bonneville and Catalina were on the same wheelebase, there was no reason for a distinct model like the Executive to exist; and the Catalina Brougham was created so there would be something (though not a completely distinct model) to fill in the space between the Catalina and Bonneville.
I think it may have been a little of both — the Grand Ville was an attempt to take a step further upmarket, but to make room for it the Bonneville had to be positioned slightly further downward (which involved moving it to the Catalina wheelbase), eliminating any need for the slow-selling Executive. Whether the Catalina Brougham was supposed to replace the Ventura, or the Executive, or both, I’m not sure. Whatever the case, consumers didn’t see it as really serving any purpose, and didn’t buy it.
I hadn’t realized that the Grand Ville used C-body rooflines. Did this continue in 1973 when the Grand Ville stopped using a longer wheelbase than the other Pontiac B-bodies?
My impression is that both the Bonneville and the Grand Ville experienced mediocre sales. In hindsight, the Grand Ville didn’t attract enough buyers above Pontiac’s traditional clientle, and just there wasn’t enough room for both of them in the swath of the full-size market that Pontiac covered. After the 1973 wheelbase consolidation, it made even less sense to offer both of them, and Pontiac ultimately decided to go with the Bonneville only.
Yes, in ’73 the GrandVilles kept the C-body roofline on both the 2-door and 4-door hardtop bodystyles. It’s kind of odd that the convertible roofline resembles the “sport coupe” style of the Bonneville & Catalinas though. I believe this was also the case in ’74.
Why is it that every time I look at the back end of one of these I think 1974 Matador sedan?
I was looking again at the green car & marveling at how nice a car it really is. Just looking at the unworn horn buttons speaks volumes. For a Catalina, it does have quite a few options on it too. The little things like the moldings, wheelcovers, clock, & steering wheel really mask the fact that this was Pontiac’s entry-level full sized car. The green with neutral interior trim also helps.
Check out how spartan these can look when devoid of options. The base steering wheel is particularly cheap — it’s all hard plastic, even the center “pad”. Even the Chevrolets had the center horn pad vinyl-covered! Pic is actually of a ’73 model but it’s very similar to the ’72.
You probably don’t need it but the ’72 I found was for sale. I think they were asking $2000.
That’s a steal. It’s a good thing it’s so far away because the last thing I need around here is another car 🙂
Wow, nice old Pontiac! wait for it…wait………wait for it…….I own it and YES it is for sale. 1972 with 89k original miles. runs and drives great. $2500 kevin 563-343-8970
Bettendorf, Iowa less than 10 miles from where I had it for sale in Rock Island Illinios
I noticed it was on ebay. Nice car! Hope you enjoyed the article and that the car goes to a good home!
True right
The ’72 Catalina was my high school driver training car. Icebox white with a blue interior…and the 455 4-barrel under the hood. Not sure what the dealer was thinking when he chose the car to donate for the year. We also had a ’72 Ford Galaxie and a ’72 Chevy Impala, both of which were equipped with their base engines.
Loved that Catalina.
I’ve read that manual tranmissions were still available on the full-size Pontiac, even upmarket models, for the first half of 1971. Only 6 wagons were so equipped, four Catalinas and two Grand Safaris.
For a long time the use of the C-body roof on the B-body Bonneville et al fooled me into thinking they actually were C-bodies (particularly noticeable on ’74-’76 coupes and ’75-’76 sedans thanks to the opera window setup and lack of rear roll-down windows on the coupes which the C lacked but the other Bs still had.
“finicky radio antenna embedded in the windshield”
I can’t be the only one that never had an issue with that embedded antenna. From Chicago to Dubuque it only seemed to be an issue on AM stations and usually only when going under a bridge.
“finicky radio antenna embedded in the windshield”
“I can’t be the only one that never had an issue with that embedded antenna”
I had that in my 1973 Cadillac. It was not very good in the western part of Denmark.
Am pretty sure though it was because the radio stations didn’t broadcast with very strong signals in the 1980’s and 1990’s.
In the Copenhagen area or if I crossed the border to Germany, I didn’t have any problems. The signal seeking FM radio would even work perfectly there. Never listen to AM.
I always thought the big Grand Villes were particularly handsome cars. All the grandeur and gravity of big Cadillacs, but somehow more sporting.
And now I know why: they had B body roofs! I never realized that. Really strikingly good looking cars.
If I had space for it, I’d consider collecting a ’71 Grand Ville – the sedan’s nice, and coupe is glorious. Not crazy about the ’72’s new face, and the ’73’s (or did that come in ’74?) with the fender skirts were just plan wrong.
Those early seventies Grand Villes remind me of two of the most famous: the 1973 car used in the movie The Seven-Ups and the last car Jimmy Hoffa owned, a dark green 1974.
The link to those two cars, alone, make having a good survivor as a collectable.
My Dad had a ’71 Catalina, replacing his ’68 Ventura, which replaced his ’66 Ventura, which… OK, you get it by now.
The car was OK, but the engine was a 350/2V and lacked the punch of the Ventura 400. It definitely felt more plastic-like inside. The hood felt vast in every direction, and the handling was a bit tighter than the ’68.
When he replaced it with a ’74 Grand Prix, 400/4V, I never looked back!
My Dad had a new 71 brown 2 door hardtop with the 350…must have been an early one because it had the larger set of louvres on the trunk lid that they later shrunk then elimnated. Fond memories, but it rusted within a year on the roof of all places. And, the front clip really got chipped up by winter road debris. The new feeling didn’t last long. We also had a 74 that had its share of issues and then a 76 Bonneville that was by far the best put together of the 3, and the only one I drove. Agree that the 72 is the cleanest looking, and that Grand Ville in a 2 door looks very appealing.